Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Aug 2014
M
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Aug 2014
After some consideration, this is imo one of the core issues with crazy physical damage scaling and also warfare beating weapon skills for all physical classes, which is clearly not intended.

Tbh I feel like this might even be a bug rather than the actual intended design.

This, along with adding physical resistances and immunities to the game should imo fix most of the balance issues, and is a pretty easy change (warfare bonus, not adding resistances and immunites).

Another damage scaling issue is how OP LW characters are, but I just consider them to be an equivalent of explorer mode at this point and it's ok.

Last edited by MadDemiurg; 08/10/17 03:30 AM.
Joined: Sep 2017
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Sep 2017
So you believe a 5% multiplicative bonus is a bug, yet if it was additive it would be horrible and no one would have any reason to go beyond 3 in it ever other than for Overpower. Kind of like how the weapon masteries are now other than Two-Handed.

Lets keep crying for nerfs to the last remaining good things regarding character building, instead of altering the multiple other things that need fixing first. Your suggestions would make the game unplayable. Scaling is actually fine until around level 17 anyway. If Warfare no longer gave the bonus it gives, there would 100% never be a reason to use a Scoundrel build ever again either since they would do no damage at all without it.

Last edited by Sanctuary; 08/10/17 04:20 AM.
Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
Warfare could be altered to not boost damage done by bows, crossbows, daggers, and Necromancy spells. If that is changed, then it is no longer One Ability to Rule Them All, and thus making Ranged, Scoundrel/Dual Wielding and Necromancy actually worth putting points into instead of Warfare.

Joined: Sep 2017
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Warfare could be altered to not boost damage done by bows, crossbows, daggers, and Necromancy spells. If that is changed, then it is no longer One Ability to Rule Them All, and thus making Ranged, Scoundrel/Dual Wielding and Necromancy actually worth putting points into instead of Warfare.


If Scoundrel/Dual Wielding actually worked, people would put points into it now and it clearly doesn't. Not just because Warfare is better, but because the other two options suck until Warfare is maxed. Rogues do pathetic damage without Warfare and neither Warriors or Rogues start doing really high damage until the later half of Act 2 when the game is over half finished.

You're both essentially wanting Classic to turn into Tactician and Tactician to become pointless due to it not actually being possible outside of dual Lone Wolf. How does this make Necromancy more viable anyway? It's a garbage tree other than two abilities and neither of them actually scale with stats in the first place.

Last edited by Sanctuary; 08/10/17 04:27 AM.
Joined: Aug 2014
M
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Aug 2014
I'm playing tactician with full party and maxed warfare chars are doing way too much damage. I could still do it without problems if their damage gets cut by 1/3rd easily.

Dunno what you're talking about rogues doing no damage without warfare. You would just max scoundrel first which is also a multiplicative bonus when you crit and you crit all the time + get crazy mobility with the pawn not even needing the teleport skills. Yes, two multiplicative bonuses are better than 1 but currently optimized rogue outdamages anything else in the game starting from like level 4 and up until you can stack high crit chance on 2h or crossbow (pretty late). If you find them lacking damage wise, you're not shopping for level appropriate items most likely. And warfare damage bonus nerf would affect all physical classes equally.

I would hardly call having to put mandatory 10 points into 1 skill for all physical damage dealers a "one of the few remaining good things about character building". In my book it's pretty terrible. With warfare being additive, weapon skills would at least have their secondary bonus, while warfare would still have the advantage of applying to all physical damage sources. It's still a pretty boring design imo, but at least it would be bit more balanced.

Last edited by MadDemiurg; 08/10/17 04:46 AM.
Joined: May 2014
L
member
Offline
member
L
Joined: May 2014
Originally Posted by Sanctuary
It's a garbage tree other than two abilities and neither of them actually scale with stats in the first place.


This right here is a major issue. Necromancy is a mess that lost almost all its best spells in the transition from OS1 to 2. It went from the debuff king with some nice utility and damage spells to a schizophrenic wreck.

Joined: Sep 2017
K
stranger
Offline
stranger
K
Joined: Sep 2017
Stop trying to nerf melee because magic needs to be unfucked. Unfuck magic instead.

Joined: Jan 2014
T
stranger
Offline
stranger
T
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Kierlak
Stop trying to nerf melee because magic needs to be unfucked. Unfuck magic instead.


People aren't trying to nerf melee because magic is bad, they're trying to get magic buffed because magic is bad and melee nerfed because it is to good.

Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Italy
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Italy
It's not true that rogue are useless without warfare. I'm playing on tactician (act 3) and my rogue (with dual handed and scoundrel, and just few points on warfare to use some skills) melting almost every enemy in one turn.

Last edited by drBrod; 08/10/17 08:46 AM.
Joined: Oct 2017
I
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
I
Joined: Oct 2017
"Rogues do rubbish damage without warfare... compared to people receiving double damage bonuses from warfare and 2h" great analysis there.

Warfare shouldn't be boosting physical damage of all kinds with no caveats. I'm not sure it should boost physical damage at all.


gambling on some rng cc affect is not a deep strategic decision. It's just a sign of gambling addiction.
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
I'm not sure I have any enthusiasm for yet more stuff being nerfed: there's been so many calls for it over the months and several have been acted on which I think have made the game noticeably less fun in the process. I'd rather see other stuff being boosted than risk creeping insipidity.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Sep 2017
D
stranger
Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Sep 2017
i really wanted to do mages only party, to be different, but they are so bad, that i went back to bows and shields with physical spells instead

Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Italy
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Sanctuary

If Scoundrel/Dual Wielding actually worked, people would put points into it now and it clearly doesn't. Not just because Warfare is better, but because the other two options suck until Warfare is maxed. Rogues do pathetic damage without Warfare and neither Warriors or Rogues start doing really high damage until the later half of Act 2 when the game is over half finished.


I'm not agree with this statement. Dual wielding /scoundrel actually works. I'm playing that build on tactician act 3 and just melt almost every enemies.
I dont see all this problems with warfare, honestly. I mean, i'm not using warfare too much, and do just fine.
My main chara is a necrowarrior with two handed/scoundrel, and my companion is sebille rogue with dual wield/scoundrel. Both of them do insane damage, and i put just 3-4 points in warfare just to use some skills.

Joined: Aug 2014
M
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Aug 2014
Magic is not "bad", although some stuff could use adjustments so that more options would become viable. Mages can do ok (in a sense they can beat encounters too), but it's objectively a lot more work than physical and suboptimal in every way. But imo that's what game is supposed to be on tactician. Meanwhile, regardless of how you put it, physical puts out a ridiculous amount of damage and requires little tactics or adapting to specific encounters. If facerolling encounters is the definition of "fun", yes physical does not need nerfs. But I would suggest classical or explorer for this experience.

Last edited by MadDemiurg; 08/10/17 12:25 PM.
Joined: Sep 2017
K
stranger
Offline
stranger
K
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by Terrahero
Originally Posted by Kierlak
Stop trying to nerf melee because magic needs to be unfucked. Unfuck magic instead.


People aren't trying to nerf melee because magic is bad, they're trying to get magic buffed because magic is bad and melee nerfed because it is to good.


But melee isn't too good. By it's very nature of being melee, it has to be doing more for it's investment because it's missing two key components that are present on most magic abilities: Range and AoE. If you buff magic and nerf melee, then all you have done is swap who is being saddled with the more garbage playstyle for no good reason.

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Originally Posted by MadDemiurg
If facerolling encounters is the definition of "fun", yes physical does not need nerfs. But I would suggest classical or explorer for this experience.

I'm not really sure that sort of attitude is very helpful, though we've seen a lot of it about lately.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Aug 2014
M
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Aug 2014
Physical (including melee) is too good, because it's too easy.

Missing range is not a big deal outside of very early levels (sub 4) because you get more than enough of mobility skills later on. Whirlwind and Battle Stomp are some of the best aoe skills as well and don't even have friendly fire. Rangers are also included here and they don't exactly lack range.

I wouldn't give any buffs to magic outside of buffing some trash skills (also some schools are a mess and likely need new skills to be added to actually work).

Originally Posted by vometia
Originally Posted by MadDemiurg
If facerolling encounters is the definition of "fun", yes physical does not need nerfs. But I would suggest classical or explorer for this experience.

I'm not really sure that sort of attitude is very helpful, though we've seen a lot of it about lately.


What's the problem? Suggesting a lower difficullty for players who like it easy? Isn't that what lower difficulties are for? Or are you suggesting that the game would become impossible on tactician with nerfs to some overperforming stuff?

Last edited by MadDemiurg; 08/10/17 01:35 PM.
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Originally Posted by MadDemiurg
What's the problem? Suggesting a lower difficullty for players who like it easy? Isn't that what lower difficulties are for? Or are you suggesting that the game would become impossible on tactician with nerfs to some overperforming stuff?

Edit: removed my response: it probably wasn't very helpful either.

We're probably talking cross-purposes here anyway. I suspect that the spectrum between tactician and explorer probably needs to be broadened to keep everyone happy.

Last edited by vometia; 08/10/17 01:45 PM.

J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Sep 2017
S
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
S
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by MadDemiurg
I'm playing tactician with full party and maxed warfare chars are doing way too much damage. I could still do it without problems if their damage gets cut by 1/3rd easily.

Dunno what you're talking about rogues doing no damage without warfare. You would just max scoundrel first which is also a multiplicative bonus when you crit and you crit all the time + get crazy mobility with the pawn not even needing the teleport skills. Yes, two multiplicative bonuses are better than 1 but currently optimized rogue outdamages anything else in the game starting from like level 4 and up until you can stack high crit chance on 2h or crossbow (pretty late). If you find them lacking damage wise, you're not shopping for level appropriate items most likely. And warfare damage bonus nerf would affect all physical classes equally.


How about you start over and play a Rogue that only puts points into Scoundrel/Dual Wielding then since you think that would work, when it clearly won't? How far into the game are you? Wiping the floor with your characters in Act 4 isn't a good metric and neither is Act 3 for that matter. Scaling is actually fine with Warfare until after Act 2.

Before that, Rogues don't do any damage without Warfare. That's also the primary reason so many were complaining about how "Rogues suck!" and not doing anything but dying. They kept putting points everywhere else other than Warfare.

The fact that the Scoundrel bonus is multiplicative is irrelevant when your base damage is so much lower to begin with. It also makes Battle Stomp almost entirely worthless on a Rogue, when it's not if you've invested in Warfare.

Originally Posted by drBrod
It's not true that rogue are useless without warfare. I'm playing on tactician (act 3) and my rogue (with dual handed and scoundrel, and just few points on warfare to use some skills) melting almost every enemy in one turn.


Originally Posted by MadDemiurg
I would hardly call having to put mandatory 10 points into 1 skill for all physical damage dealers a "one of the few remaining good things about character building". In my book it's pretty terrible. With warfare being additive, weapon skills would at least have their secondary bonus, while warfare would still have the advantage of applying to all physical damage sources. It's still a pretty boring design imo, but at least it would be bit more balanced.


It's only terrible in relation to the way everything else is lacking in balance. It's one of the few truly useful abilities left that makes any real difference. What you're wanting is to neuter it so that everything is equally bad.

Last edited by Sanctuary; 08/10/17 03:14 PM.
Joined: Aug 2014
M
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Sanctuary
Originally Posted by MadDemiurg
I'm playing tactician with full party and maxed warfare chars are doing way too much damage. I could still do it without problems if their damage gets cut by 1/3rd easily.

Dunno what you're talking about rogues doing no damage without warfare. You would just max scoundrel first which is also a multiplicative bonus when you crit and you crit all the time + get crazy mobility with the pawn not even needing the teleport skills. Yes, two multiplicative bonuses are better than 1 but currently optimized rogue outdamages anything else in the game starting from like level 4 and up until you can stack high crit chance on 2h or crossbow (pretty late). If you find them lacking damage wise, you're not shopping for level appropriate items most likely. And warfare damage bonus nerf would affect all physical classes equally.


How about you start over and play a Rogue that only puts points into Scoundrel/Dual Wielding then since you think that would work, when it clearly won't? How far into the game are you? Wiping the floor with your characters in Act 4 isn't a good metric and neither is Act 3 for that matter. Scaling is actually fine with Warfare until after Act 2.


I played up to Act 3 with a full physical party so far (having a rogue main from the start), it was pretty easy at start and got even easier later.

I could easily max scoundrel on my rogue first instead and still do great damage. It's not that much worse than warfare if you do the numbers and it also adds mobility. And the difference with warfare being multiplicative actually becomes way bigger later in the game when you have high main stat and crit multiplier, the earlygame impact will actually be not as big.

DW is not great though, mostly because +1% dodge is bit gimmicky, I wouldn't mind changing its secondary bonus. Still, a rogue with max scoundrel alone would be doing more than enough damage.

Claiming that rogues don't do any damage without warfare is bit ridiculous. Even at 10 warfare, it's 50% damage bonus and you won't have 10 immediately in act 1. 10 scoundrel would boost your dps by 33% when you crit and you always crit (and also add 2m of movement range). Yes, battle stomp would be weaker on a rogue compared to a 2h warrior because of lower base damage but I fail to see how it's a bad thing. It would still do ok damage and it's a great cc even if it did 0 damage.

Other physical classes will have it worse with warfare nerf (or fix) if anything, cause they don't have access to easy crits and no other multiplicative damage bonuses. They're so much better than elemental ones though it would only make them bit more balanced (still this alone is not nearly enough).

Last edited by MadDemiurg; 08/10/17 03:29 PM.
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5